National Republican., 1887-11-11
Tho British Policy Rampant.

For the utterance OF unmltigated politi-
cal bosh the New York Times is Justly dis
,lngushcd. But in its comments on the
New York election It breaks its cranRiest
record. The subjolned paragraph is its
latest feat ,ns
The Democrats of New York ba1 thA ...gacity
to see that now was the time, and this state
the arena, in which to fight for the principle
of revenue reform. They put that principle
clearly, definitely into their platform, and they
have met their protectionist opponents at every
point on this issue. They have won q sigual
victory, and they will go from their battle
here before the majority OF their party in the
House and demand that this same fight shall
he made in the national elections next year.
The majority must listen to them. The logic
Of this contest and It's splendid result cannot
be ignored. A revenue reform bill on the lines
laid down by the New York Democrats must
pass the House before adjournment, and the
party, with q New York candidate, backed by
the triumph In his own state must go to the
country on that issue. For the FIRST time since
the war closed there is a fair prospect that
square national vote will lie had on the most
important of national questions. This is all
that Is needed to secure at last the reform
which the interests of the country SO plainly
require.
For the purpose of keeping in line with
the British free trade policy, this admins
tration organ ignores every material fact In
the campaign, and coniures up an issue
which had no influence ON the result. hit
had any influence, why does not the Times
follow out its go called reasoning relative to
the result In Ohio Massachusetts, Rhode
Island, New Jersey, aud Virginia? These
states offer wide field for the play Of the
| free traders imagination, for unfortunately
| In bis case the facts are all adverse. In
| Ohio the Democrats for the fret time fol.
lowed the lead OF Frank Hurd as nearly as
| possible TO the line OF free trade. They
took the Cleveland platform, aud openly
| proclaimed that they represented tho ad
| ministration. The Republicans frankly
took issue with them, and doubled Gov,
| Foraker's majority-on the ground OF
| the "reform" Administrations choos-
ing. 10 Massachusetts the issue
| was equally plain, and Gov. Ames's
| plurality was raised from 1900 to 1900.
Rhode Island gives the protectionists an
| other member Of Congress by handsome
Republican gains. New Jersey Republi.
cans have stood squarely upon the plat
form of protection, and the Democratic
| New York Sun admits that "the Republi.
cans have not for many years, IT., indeed,
they ever have, had go large majority IN
the legislature as this,n which foots up at
least seventeen on joint ballot. And as to
Virginia, II the sophistry of the New
York Times were truth, the Democrats
| would have been beaten. Last year they
lost the state on a free-trade platform this
gear they carry it by adopting the Republl-
can doctrine of protection, for which the
free traders roundly abused them.
But, ignoring these plain facts, as the
free.trade crank always will, there remain
others to belle this screed of the Times.
Within a space OF two miles from the
Time. office, in New York, is a voting
population OF, say, 10O,O00--of which
about four-fifths always have been, are,
and always will be Democrats, because
they are Incapable OF discriminating be.
tween principle and free whlskey. Does
the Times think they vote for alleged "rev
nue. reforni?" Yet the vote of this little
corner of the great state OF New York has
been more than enough to cover the aver
age Democratic majority in the whole state
for many years.
Again, there is In New York vote oi
probably $4,000, and directly represeutine
the grog shops and breweries. Does tht
Times think these men know or care any
thing about free trade except in rum2 Yo
they regularly furnish more than enough
votes TO give the Democrats their majority
ard they contribute enormously to tbs
Democratic campaign fund.
Again, the prohibition vote in New York
this year is so, 600. Does not the Times knos
that this vote is largely composed OF pro.
tectionists, and tnat were so called revenue
reform the sole issue, they would be GrrlyeC
with the Republicans and give them th,
state by handsome maioritles?
On the whole, we are glad that the free
traders are jumping in early to press thei
peculiar views. The people need a llttlt
stirring up to warn them of the danger o
this British policy. The crankIest cranl
eXtant is the free-trade crank, and the Re
publIcans are praying for his employment
by the Democratic party in the next cam
Iaier.